Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=923564 --- Comment #9 from Eduardo Echeverria <echevemaster@xxxxxxxxx> --- Hi Dan, I'm sorry for delay, I was busy in this days. (In reply to comment #8) > - Building RPM with .gz and not .xz > - Verified the github URL is valid > (https://github.com/danfruehauf/NetworkManager-ssh/archive/ > 8767415030da697a1a08cb536166c0ca7bb037b2/NetworkManager-ssh-0.0.3-8767415. > tar.gz) I have a question about this, and I'll summarize in the following points: 1.- If you download the tarball in SOURCES folder and extracted the files of this tarball the resultant folder should be NetworkManager-ssh-8767415030da697a1a08cb536166c0ca7bb037b2, Why the tarball in the SRPM is NetworkManager-ssh-0.0.3? the tarball should not be modified, that means that the sources must be pristine, should be packaged as they are, the only way in which it can be modified is via patch. 2.- %setup in this case should be %setup -q -n %{name}-%{commit} 3.- the sources in github they have no file autogen.sh or configure, therefore, mock fails to build. check it with mock or fedora-review > - Remove scriptlets > - If there's nothing in %post and $postun, should the sections exist > anyway? %post and %postun must be removed, Requires(post): %{_bindir}/update-desktop-database Requires(postun): %{_bindir}/update-desktop-database also must be removed > - I've changed the %{checkout} tag to conform the standards, although it's > not 100% clear. An example in that file would make things heaps clearer... > - What is exactly %{alphatag}? Is it defined at all? %{X}? > - Currently I have 'Release: 2.%{checkout}%{?dist}' > - Release (2, or %{X}) is separated by a comma from %{checkout} > - %{checkout} is 20130322git%{shortcommit} - much like > '20110102git9e88d7e' in the URL a good example is this link: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/python-docutils.git/tree/python-docutils.spec Release Tag for Pre-Release Packages: 0.%{X}.%{alphatag} Where %{X} is the release number increment, and %{alphatag} is the string that came from the version i.e. 0.2.20130322git8767415 => 0.%{X}.%{alphatag} also in the changelog Fri Mar 22 2013 Dan Fruehauf <malkodan@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.0.3-0.2.20130322git8767415 - Changes to conform with Fedora packaging standards > I really hope we're making some sort of progress, I'm really trying my best > as you can see... :) Of course we are progressing, after we have reviewed the package thoroughly, You will be sponsored ;) Regards Eduardo - -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=frZijliHe2&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review